On Mon, Mar 12, 2012 at 02:46:04PM +0530, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote: > Hi Felix, > > On Monday 12 March 2012 02:32 PM, Felix Fietkau wrote: > >On 2012-03-12 6:57 AM, Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan wrote: > >>From: Mohammed Shafi Shajakhan<[email protected]> > >> > >>not sure if these checks are previously avoided may be those revision of > >>chipsets are obselete ? > >NACK. The extra checks that this patch adds have been intentionally > >removed, since all earlier versions were never sold and thus do not need > >to be considered. This simplifies the generated binary code. > > IMHO i don't think this patch does anything wrong to deserve a NACK! > sometimes these optimizations make it tad difficult if we want to > quickly check with the HAL code.
"HAL" code from internal codebases need to change, not the other way around. You have your priorities wrong. I support the NACK. Luis _______________________________________________ ath9k-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ath9k.org/mailman/listinfo/ath9k-devel
